Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Gary Johnson Hates Liberty and Freedom

Quick question: which of the current candidates running for President of the United States issued the following statement last year on the 10th anniversary of 9/11?

“As we all pause this weekend to remember the events of September 11, 2001, our thoughts are with those who lost their lives, those who saved so many lives, and a nation that showed its greatness in countless ways. 9/11 and the days after were a time when ordinary Americans did extraordinary things. Our thoughts and our gratitude are also with the amazing men and women of our military who are putting themselves on the line every day to keep us safe. The fight against those who would do us harm continues today, and it is a fight we must carry out with the same determination that was so magnificently displayed by the heroes of 9/11.

“America is about liberty. Ten years ago, liberty was attacked. To those who lost their lives and those many more whose lives were forever changed, our deep obligation is to insure that liberty prevails not just today, but for generations to come.”

So was it job-exporting, Wall Street oligarch Willard Mitt Romney? Or was it Patriot Act-loving, American-citizen assassinating President Hopey-Changey? Wrong, Natch. It was, in fact, Libertarian candidate for president and supposed lover of human freedom Gary Johnson.

Whatever else you may think about the events of 9/11, and I am not here to get into a debate about whether it was an inside job or anything like that, it must be stated that no singular event in American history has caused a greater curtailment of civil liberties and human freedom than our government's out of control reaction to it. Two unnecessary wars of choice that have massacred hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi and Afghani civilians, the establsihment of concentration camp in Gunatanamo Bay, a world wide campaign of assassination without trial, the acceptance of torture as a legitimate use of government power, drone missile strikes abroad, drone surveillance at home and the enactment of the Patriot Act are merely the highlights of a systemic program representing a far greater attack on "liberty" than anything Osama bin Laden and his minions could have whipped up in their wildest dreams.

I've been on record here stating that I do not plan to participate in the upcoming sham election this November, but if I did go to the polls it would be to at least cast a ballot against the two oligarch-approved candidates by voting third party. With a statement like the one above, however, that could have come from one of the horrible speeches at the recently concluded Republican and Democratic National conventions, Gary Johnson has placed himself squarely on the side of our oppressors and thus is unworthy of support by anyone who REALLY cares about liberty.

So what should Governor Johnson have said instead? How about something along these lines:

"As we pause to remember the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attack on the United States and to appreciate again the actions of the heroic first responders who gave their lives on that awful day, we must also reexamine ourselves and question whether our nation's collective response during this past decade to those attacks have been appropriate or consistent with a nation that supposedly values liberty.

"We must strive to curtail the abuse of liberty by immediately ending all foreign occupations, closing the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, vigorously prosecuting the use of torture, repealing the Patriot Act, ending assassinations without trial and stopping the use of drone missiles to carry out random attacks abroad and drone aircraft to conduct domestic surveillance. Only by respecting the human rights and dignity of all of the world's people and the Constitutional rights of our own citizens here at home may we possibly hope to maintain the ideals of liberty and freedom that the founders of this great nation bestowed upon us."

After all, if you can't trust the Libertarian Party to support liberty, whom can you trust?

Bonus: "Whether your state is red or is blue...always be wary of people who rule"

7 comments:

I'll never forget the scene of My Pet Goat. It was just astonishing to see Bush sitting there, minute after minute, after he got the news. The cracks in the official sham story continue to widen, in an article today in the NYTimes:

I'd suggest reading the Green Party platform. See what you think, and vote your conscience. Regarding the Patriot Act, read section F1. It doesn't include closing Guantanamo, but no party does.

On the 'throwing away your vote' mantra one hears about voting third party, one truly throws it away by voting for a person or set of policies that they don't truly support (or by not voting). The system will never change if there isn't public pressure to change in the form of voting and/or demonstrations. If you don't support any of the third parties, write someone in. U.S. history isn't without examples of third parties and independents having major effects on U.S. policy.

This is not to say that Dr. Stein wouldn't be up against it if by some miracle she was elected.

On the corruption of the system itself, I was very sad to read this:http://news.yahoo.com/why-elizabeth-warren-wants-repeal-part-obamacare-163219090--abc-news-politics.html

Warren WAS one of the very few people I thought had a chance of truly running on principle. I was hoping the article would be about arguing against the individual mandate, but no, it's about a 2.3% medical device tax - because her potential constituency includes several makers (and its employees) of medical devices. So, like every other person in Congress, principle is thown out the window when it comes to individual selfish needs.

This is why we're cooked. We can't see beyond ourselves, and our system enforces this myopia.

You have to understand what these randroids mean when they talk about liberty. The only liberty they really care about, is the freedom to make money. OH! AND LEGALIZE THE WEED, MAN! That's it. They want freedom to make money. If it in any way hinders making money, that's what they think tyranny is. They don't think it's tyranny to wall and fence off every piece of land on Earth and sell it to private owners and corporations, they don't think it's tyranny to pay slave wages, they don't think it's tyranny to give land owners absolute property rights, especially over any tenants that will be forced to rent from them. Here, this is what I always link to when people are discussing (right-wing)libertarianism:http://www.infoshop.org/page/AnarchistFAQSectionF

What a silly blog post. You complain about a politician's statement as if that alone was his position, while ignoring that he actually supports almost all of the positions you believe he should have stated?

You write (and I insert comments in all caps): "We must strive to curtail the abuse of liberty by immediately ending all foreign occupations--GARY JOHNSON WANTS TO CLOSE FOREIGN MILITARY BASES AND PULL OUT OF AFGHANISTAN NOW, NOT WAIT FOR 2014. WHILE I'M SURE YOU COULD POINT TO OTHER MILITARY ENGAGEMENTS AND CALL THEM 'OCCUPATIONS', ODDS ARE GARY OPPOSES THOSE AS WELL), closing the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay (IT IS TRUE HE HAS SAID IT CAN'T REALLY BE CLOSED AS THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A NEED FOR SOMEPLACE TO PUT FOREIGN ENEMY COMBATANTS AS LONG AS WE ARE ENGAGED IN WARS, WHICH HE INCIDENTALLY WANTS TO END, BUT HE DOES SUPPORT FULL HABEAS CORPUS RIGHTS AND DUE PROCESS FOR ALL IN GUANTANAMO), vigorously prosecuting the use of torture (HE IS ABSOLUTELY OPPOSED TO TORTURE AND WOULD OUTLAW IT), repealing the Patriot Act (CHECK, WANTS TO REPEAL THE PATRIOT ACT AND THE NDAA PROVISIONS WHICH ARE SIMILARLY BAD), ending assassinations without trial (ALSO AGREES, ESPECIALLY WITH THE SUPPOSED NDAA AUTHORITY) and stopping the use of drone missiles to carry out random attacks abroad and drone aircraft to conduct domestic surveillance (JOHNSON AGREES!). Only by respecting the human rights and dignity of all of the world's people and the Constitutional rights of our own citizens here at home may we possibly hope to maintain the ideals of liberty and freedom that the founders of this great nation bestowed upon us.(AND THOUGH HE OBVIOUSLY HASN'T RESPONDED TO YOUR QUOTE, WOULD PROBABLY SUPPORT THIS STATEMENT COMPLETELY)"

Very odd blog post, it's as if you hadn't even investigated his positions on these topics. Nothing in the Johnson quote you cited opposes these ideas, unless you believe you can't support the troops because the civilian leadership has them doing things they shouldn't have ever been asked to do. It is true that Gary Johnson said the original attacks on Afghanistan were justified in response to the 9/11 attacks, but he also said that mission ended in the first six months and we should have been out of Afghanistan thereafter (11 years ago now).